Why Bush? Bush voters show yourselves!

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 03:21 AM
link   
I followed the election of 2004 very closely. I am a strong Democrat and I voted for Kerry and supported him as much as I could. I can't understand that Bush won again! Why do people vote for a man, who lied to us about WMD's? Why did they vote for him? A man who sent thousands of troops to Iraq, for supposed WMD's that never existed, just to finish off daddys work and get more money, power and oil.
Maybe some people voted for Bush because of ethical reasons. Well what is wrong with you people, who don't want gays to be allowed to have a marriage? Do they hurt you with that, or even insult you? I thought all people should be treated equally? Does church make politics better? No it makes it worse! The church has too much influence on politics, especially in the States!!!
I think Bush supporters should really watch Michael Moores Fahrenheit 9/11! He makes some good points about this topic! We've been lied to over and over again, and it looks like some people do not want to see this!

A quote of Eminems new song called "Mosh":
Imagine it pouring, it's raining down on us,
Mosh pits outside the oval office
Someone's trying to tell us something, maybe this is God just saying
we're responsible for this monster, this coward, that we have empowered
This is Bin Laden, look at his head nodding,
How could we allow something like this, Without pumping our fist
Now this is our, final hour
Let me be the voice, and your strength, and your choice
Let me simplify the rhyme, just to amplify the noise
Try to amplify the times it, and multiply it by six
Teen million people are equal of this high pitch
Maybe we can reach Al Quaida through my speech
Let the President answer on high anarchy
Strap him with AK-47, let him go
Fight his own war, let him impress daddy that way
No more blood for oil, we got our own battles to fight on our soil
No more psychological warfare to trick us to think that we ain't loyal
If we don't serve our own country we're patronizing a hero
Look in his eyes, it's all lies, the stars and stripes
They've been swiped, washed out and wiped,
And Replaced with his own face, mosh now or die
If I get sniped tonight you'll know why, because I told you to fight


Keep your eyes open people! The axis of evil are right here, in our country!
Peace, love and wonder

F3arTh3Dark




posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 04:06 AM
link   
For one thing look at your sources - Micheal Moore, etc I'm sure these would all be fair weather friends, but watch them scatter to the wind when real trouble comes. I am a bush supporter because he Has core values unlike his conteporaries and his immediate predeccesor.

Don't blame W for acting on intelligence that everyone in the entire world believed to be true, including your beloved John Kerry. Infact JK stated in 2003 that to leave Saddem Hussien fetered with WMD would be insane.

A christian becomes a president and hes labbled a mad man, but where was your outrage when clinten spread his semen all over the white house oval office. Perhaps it was a good thing that Lincoln was shot, after all, that christian man set hundreds of thousands of black people free-That utter mad man! And George washington, who was he to declare november 26 a day of thanksgiving to God- what an out rage!

Why don't you just addmit it, your problem isn't with WMD's, it's about a man who holds to a better and higher standard then you. Is the light too bright for you. But don't worry in another couple of years your kids will have the completely re-written politicaly correct version of American History, and there will be no more talk of removing God from our "constutional" minds. what you want is a constitution that protects, rather allows the depravity of evil minds to rule, while silecing All Christian points of view!
Furthermoore you non- military prissies need to quit saying that W sent our "children" to die in Iraq. These are grown men and women who volunteered do do a job that you wussies were to a fraid to do.

You just remember this Holiday the Freedoms you have and why you have them; they are a gift of the American military.

[edit on 27-11-2004 by Thomas Crowne]



posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 04:39 AM
link   

Furthermoore you non- military prissies need to quit saying that W sent our "children" to die in Iraq. These are grown men and women who volunteered do do a job that you wussies were to a fraid to do.

You just remember this Holiday the Freedoms you have and why you have them; they are a gift of the American military.


Ok I don't think you know this yet: I'm not a non- Military Prissie! See here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Go Navy!

I don't rely on Michael Moore, he is not like a god to me, but he makes a lot of good points and has proof for them (Did you even watch the movie?)

You are talking about core values...like what? Can you name any of them?


Don't blame W for acting on intelligence that everyone in the entire world believed to be true


Well in a real world company normally the CEO of the company would get fired for false intelligence! Did Bush fire the "CEO of intelligence"?

And not everybody believed that intelligence! There were the ones who were smarter than the laughable "coalition of the willing" (Germany, France)who've been just bought by the United States for their support! As a comparison in Gulf War one there were 81 supporters, but in this present war there are only 30.....go figure....supporters my butt!

Did you know: Jefferson and Washington were Masons? They knew about the seperation between the church and the State!


These are grown men and women who volunteered do do a job that you wussies were to a fraid to do

Yes of course they volunteered, only to protect their country and go to war, only if needed. There is no sense in this present war or is there? Maybe the supposed WMD's and the war against terrorism? Just look how Condie rated the threat of the WMD in the whole war: First of all it was the big smoking gun and WMD exist. Then suddenly the media reported that Powell and Condie are searching for PROGRAMS of WMD's. A few months later these Programs turned into: PLANS OF PROGRAMS for WMD's and then REACTIVATION OF THE PLANS FOR PROGRAMS for WMD's. I don't have time right now to find exact quotes of the media, but you can google it. The threat level dropped down during the war and there never were any WMD's. Bush knew it all along, and as soon as there was proof, that the WMD's did not exist they just dropped the threat level!

DENY IGNORANCE!!!!!!




posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 04:45 AM
link   
Deny ignorance is right. Try it out.

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." - President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." - President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." - Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." - Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18,1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." - Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens Carl Levin (D-MI), Tom Daschle (D-SD), John Kerry( D - MA), and others Oct 9,1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." - Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." - Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." - Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." - Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." - Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" - Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members.. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." - Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation . And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real" - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

As far your lack of understanding of America's traditional morals and values, if your parents didn't get it through to you, who am I to teach you the basics?

Furthermore, is there any reason why you feel you must start another thread of the same old crap that has been stated so many times? I'm sure you feel you're original as the first sin, but this is a broken record.

Move along, nothing new to see here. *yawn*

[edit on 27-11-2004 by Thomas Crowne]



posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 05:08 AM
link   
Recorded conversations - Iraqi officers discussing removal of a "modified vehicle" and deleting references to nerve gas from documents. If genuine, and not spliced, these radio intercepts suggest Iraq may have been hiding some biowarfare arms, or was racing to eliminate any residues or evidence of its 1980s weapons program in advance of UN inspections.

(Considering the U.S. military loses tens of millions worth of weapons and supplies each year, and the Los Alamos centre has misplaced large amounts of nuclear materials, it's not implausible that Iraq has bits and pieces of chemical arms scattered about, such as the empty 122-mm rockets recently discovered in a bunker, that escaped its UN-mandated inventory.)

Satellite imagery - ammo storage bunkers which Powell claimed were used for chemical weapons that were moved out prior to inspection.

(UN inspectors examined them and found nothing suspicious. "Sniffers" used by inspectors can detect the past presence of chemical and biological weapons.)

The infamous mobile biological weapons labs mounted on trucks - a.k.a. "Saddam's vans of death." Powell claimed defectors reported there were 18 of these cruising around Iraq.

(Defector information is always suspect. UN chief arms inspector Hans Blix said his men had examined some of the "death trucks" and found they were, in fact, mobile food-testing labs.)

Some 100-400 tons of chemical agents, including four tons of VX nerve gas, and some biological weapons, originally supplied in the 1980s by the U.S. and secretly developed by British technicians, were still unaccounted for.

(This remains a major question. Iraq says it destroyed them, but lacks proper documentation. They may be hidden. But most were made in the 1980s, and may be degraded or inert from age. Nerve gas and germs are weapons of mass destruction. Mustard gas, the bulk of Iraq's chemical weaponry, is not, being no more lethal than napalm or the fuel-air explosives the U.S. and Russia are using in Afghanistan and Chechnya.)

Iraq was developing nuclear weapons.

(UN nuclear inspectors have repeatedly contradicted U.S. claims. They concluded the notorious aluminum tubes Powell said were for uranium-enrichment centrifuges were actually conventional 122-mm rocket artillery casings.)

According to UN Resolution 687 after the Gulf war, Iraq is permitted missiles with a range of 150 km. The U.S. charges Iraq is testing missiles that have flown 14-20 km farther.

(This is nothing unusual when testing a new propellant system. Powell also accused Iraq of developing a 1,200-km missile that could reach Israel, based on photos of an enlarged test stand. Iraq may have a dozen or so old Scud missiles hidden away.)

Iraq is dragging its feet on private interviews of its nuclear scientists.

(True. Hawks in the Bush administration and Israel say the only way to ensure Iraq never builds strategic weapons is to jail all of its 10,000 military scientists and technicians - who also face the wrath of Saddam if they appear to turn over incriminating evidence.)

Powell claimed he had proof positive Iraq was linked to al-Qaida through Ansar al-Islam, a small, 600-man Islamist group in the Kurdish region of northern Iraq (not under Saddam's control), and through a "deadly terrorist network" led by one Abu Musa al-Zarqawi.

(The first charge was immediately dismissed by Ansar's leader, Mullah Krekar, a longtime, bitter foe of Saddam. And al-Zarqawi turned out to be an unknown nobody, not on any FBI wanted list. His name came from suspects being tortured in Jordan. Many reputable experts on terrorism scoffed at Powell's overblown charges.)

Sitting silently behind Powell was Central Intelligence Agency chief George Tenet. His agency has contradicted White House claims that Iraq had nuclear capability and posed an imminent threat to the U.S. or anyone else. In a recent article, former CIA Iraq desk chief Stephen Pelletiere cast doubt on the charge, repeated by Bush and Powell, that Iraq gassed its own Kurdish citizens in the town of Halabja.

Faked intelligence

Note: America's two most recent major wars - Vietnam and the Gulf - began with release of faked "intelligence" information: the non-existent Gulf of Tonkin attack in 1964, and doctored photos of a non-existent Iraqi invasion buildup on the Saudi border in 1990.

A more neutral observer might have concluded the U.S. was exaggerating scraps of uncorroborated information, while Iraq was trying to appear co-operative while still hiding some of its most sensitive military secrets.



posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 05:20 AM
link   
All I hear from you is the typical liberal crap, while the Democrat chickenhawk noises are totally ignored. As far as the U.S. supplied special weapons material, why don't you point out that most was supplied by other nations, we supplied, what, 3%? Yeah, we don't want to talk about the whole story, do we? We just want to make it sound as if the righteous war is unrighteous. Problem is, a lot of information from a lot of other people have to be ignored.



posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 05:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by F3arTh3Dark

You are talking about core values...like what? Can you name any of them?


the belief thata stable family is one of the most important things needed to preserve a nation- as the family goes, so goes the nation.


Did you know: Jefferson and Washington were Masons? They knew about the seperation between the church and the State!


As a matter of fact I did. Idon't believe that they were some how involved in a Texx Marrs conspiricy to create a one world government, as I sure you don't believe! But I do know that they and many of the peers also held a deep belief in Jesus Christ as evident by their many speeches and writings. And it was not on a few occasions that they oppenly prayed to Him. Un fortunately we don't get this kind of eduction in our schools any more. Schools which buy the way were designed so that people could read especially the Bible. the separation your talking a bout didn't exist. we created it.


Yes of course they volunteered, only to protect their country and go to war, only if needed. There is no sense in this present war or is there? Maybe the supposed WMD's and the war against terrorism? Just look how Condie rated the threat of the WMD in the whole war: First of all it was the big smoking gun and WMD exist. Then suddenly the media reported that Powell and Condie are searching for PROGRAMS of WMD's. A few months later these Programs turned into: PLANS OF PROGRAMS for WMD's and then REACTIVATION OF THE PLANS FOR PROGRAMS for WMD's. I don't have time right now to find exact quotes of the media, but you can google it. The threat level dropped down during the war and there never were any WMD's. Bush knew it all along, and as soon as there was proof, that the WMD's did not exist they just dropped the threat level!


Bush knew it al along! He was the only one huh! well that settles it then i guess it was all about the oil then! perhaps we should have allowed Hitler to continue his conquest of the European nations in the forties. After all, he didn't attack us did he?

by the way what media would that be ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN or the 911 movie.



posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 07:06 AM
link   
Why Bush? 1st of all, ask that to ALGORE and Hillary. They knew Bush could not be beaten. That is why they chose not to run. John Kerry was a sacraficial lamb, he had no chance.
Democrats are a party with no heartbeat. Their main message is "we care", that is like wearing a stupid ribbon. "Look at me, I'm wearing a ribbon, and I'm better than you, because I care."

Caring about health care does not help people receive it affordably.
Caring about the poor does not make them rich.
Caring about education does not make kids smarter.
Caring about Social Security does not make it a good program.
Caring about the enviroment does not make the air cleaner.
Saying over and over again that you have a plan doesn't mean you do.
Saying you will be tough on terrorist doesn't mean anything if you have to get "world approval" before you take action.

Bush on the other hand, has plans to partially privatize Social Security, join people together to make health care more affordable, make teachers and schools accountable, keep terrorist on the run, and most important, keeping more of MY money in my pocket.

Since the Democrats offered no choice, the only choice was President Bush.



posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 07:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Carseller4

Bush on the other hand, has plans to partially privatize Social Security, join people together to make health care more affordable, make teachers and schools accountable, keep terrorist on the run, and most important, keeping more of MY money in my pocket.

Since the Democrats offered no choice, the only choice was President Bush.


Alright I see this isn't going anywhere and we could bring up many more aspects why Bush is better than Kerry or why Kerry is better than Bush.

Basically you could say: They are both assholes but Kerry is less an asshole than Bush (This is just my opinion and I see I can't change yours)
I just don't see what Bush did the last 4 years for his country, except playing world police and sending the troops (including me) downrange for....yeah for what?...WMD's? NO Saddamm the bad guy? Maybe....OIL? More likely. If you guys know a bit about stock brokerage, you can just see how the stocks went up after the official end of the war (which is still not over). Guys, listen up: Bush just used Saddamm to go to Iraq and make some big $$$$ Of course, we the people who are good patriots and don't ask questions believe some guy, who can hardly read and depends on his advisors.
That's my part on this and I'm sad to have such a # for a president four more years.

So keep your eyes open, question everything, deny ignorance and enjoy your freedom, because things will change!

Best regards
F3arTh3Dark



posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 07:42 AM
link   
P.s: Oh yeah what I forgot, I hope some of you won't feel bad I didn't want to attack anybody. I'm just using my right (freedom of speech) didnt want to insult anybody!
Best regards
FTD



posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 08:57 AM
link   
President Harry S. Truman summed up the Democratic party argument best when he said "If you want to live like a Republican, vote Democratic."

In our day and age the pertinence of that idea is highly interesting. Here we have a big government Republican feeding the rich tons of money, no bid contracts, Enron financial scams, and the theme of the day is you can get away with anything. That same theme but with different companies happens with the Democrats, but more crumbs fall from the table somehow.

We need someone today who would find that maxim above, who would walk the walk and talk the talk. It does not matter whether that person is democrat, republican, or from anywhere else, someone please just do your job and quit siphoning the blood out of this country.

Bush won if not because of computer bytes, that people dream of living like Republicans, good Republicans that is.



posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 09:52 AM
link   
Well, here are the reasons why I did NOT vote for Bush. I was planning on it last year, then I found out a few things:

--Skull and Bones.
--Bush is not 100% pro-life and has NO intention of criminalizing abortion
--Patriot Act
--Bush is okay with gay civil unions.
--Systematic shredding of the Constitution

I voted for Michael Peroutka, Constitution Party. The CP is against the Patriot Act, against illegal wars such as the one going on in Iraq (it wasn't declared by Congress and Iraq was no real threat). It has a 100% pro-life, anti-sodomy platform.

I even have a Constitution Party membership card.


Constitution Party



posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 11:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Amethyst
Well, here are the reasons why I did NOT vote for Bush. I was planning on it last year, then I found out a few things:

--Skull and Bones.
--Bush is not 100% pro-life and has NO intention of criminalizing abortion
--Patriot Act
--Bush is okay with gay civil unions.
--Systematic shredding of the Constitution

I voted for Michael Peroutka, Constitution Party. The CP is against the Patriot Act, against illegal wars such as the one going on in Iraq (it wasn't declared by Congress and Iraq was no real threat). It has a 100% pro-life, anti-sodomy platform.

I even have a Constitution Party membership card.


Constitution Party


Im a fraid that is a wasted vote Even daniel served under a goddless man



posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 01:58 PM
link   
Democrats love to raise taxes and give that money to wellfare moms rather than NASA and our military.



posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 02:05 PM
link   
Newsflash 51% of American Voters chose Bush, and it pisses the liberals off.


Can I get a group WAH!



posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 02:19 PM
link   
Listen....
you guys...I don't wanna start a new debate here but
I'm 100% pro-choice (I know girls who had abortion)
I'm 100% pro-gays (gays are human who have the same rights as anybody else)
I'm 100% pro-marijuana ( better than viagra and other drugs sell in the pharmacy)
I'm 100% pro-environment (the earth is dying duh!)
I'm 100% against violence (that include killing innocent life EVEN if they are poor little irakis people)
I'm 100% not christian, I'm 100% spiritual and I love humanity as a whole...

Where I come from 95% of people think like me and we have a nice life, our population is happy and we don't suffer from that....

So you should think, what does it change in YOUR EVERYDAY life...for me nothing!
It just developp tolerance toward people, I put a big smile on my face and say dude (black, chinese, gay, aborted girl, pot smoker, Edsigner) I love you, you are unique!

Ameliaxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx



posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 02:22 PM
link   
Im still waiting for the "weapons of mass destruction" to be found.

Hmmmmm


The only weapons of mass destruction are in the hands of the religiously biased/dangerously nationalistic president called George W Bush.

Good post Amelia.. you have good sense.. you do not have a false sense of nationalism that dictates your political viewpoints.

Edsinger has probably never been in war, probably lives in a nice neigboorhood... someday if his neigboorhood was bombed to bits, his friends body parts laying all over for a purpose not yet totally understood.. he would himself be running to Canada


It's all about thinking of others besides yourself, and also truly believing you are equal to all... for Iraqis are humans.. we are all human.. we just slap labels on ourselves because we come from a certain country. Race/country has little to do with the quality of the human.

There is no evidence to suggest that someone who is white is of better "race" than of someone who is black. Yes, race does exist... but it is wrong to judge the worth of someone based on race.

[edit on 27-11-2004 by RedOctober90]

[edit on 27-11-2004 by RedOctober90]

[edit on 27-11-2004 by RedOctober90]



posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 02:30 PM
link   
The militaristic "frosty" wrote.


"Democrats love to raise taxes and give that money to wellfare moms rather than NASA and our military."

Haha, I'd rather see it spent on helping people rather than the creation of new weapons used for the sole purpose of political gain. Yes, help fund NASA too but keep the military out of it.

The problem is the money paid to these programs never properly make it there. This is the real problem and this is why taxes rise. If you misplace funds your probably going to jack up the costs.



posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 02:43 PM
link   
Look, you are missing the point. As Thomas Crowne pointed out in an earlier post there were alot of politicians in the US and Britain that were speaking out against Saddam. There was a plan to invade Iraq for its oil a long time ago. Iraq was nudged into invading Kuwait so that the Brits and the US could gain control of Kuwait and Saudia Arabia. I think in 1914 the US or Britain gained the rights to develop the Iraqi oil fields. The contract was for 75 years. Iraq was signing or had signed deals with russia, china and france to work in thier oil fields of late, this closed the brits and the us out of the oil fields. The next thing that happened was an invasion of Iraq. The war was over oil. The whole Iran nuclear problem is over oil. Most wars fought since the 1900's have been over oil.



posted on Nov, 27 2004 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by RedOctober90
Im still waiting for the "weapons of mass destruction" to be found.

The only weapons of mass destruction are in the hands of the religiously biased/dangerously nationalistic president called George W Bush.




Yeah! I, like you, am still waiting for the WMDs to be found. Isn't it unfortunate that Clinton gave Sadam eight years to hide them?

Before you even say there were 'no WMDs', go visit my father in the VA! Sarin gas was used on him and his platoon (of which, most have slowly passed away from long and hard diseases. Others came home to produce deformed and/or mentally-ill children) during the gulf war. So, Sadam not only used these WMDs on his own people, he used them on ours as well.

Maybe Edsinger didn't fight in war, did you? (Those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones! I'm proud of my family house, we can sit at Thanksgiving and be thankful to finally have an administration that is concerned with the welfare of it's people, as well as other people around the world.)

BTW, take a look at Bush's and Kerry's financial records (I'll try to find the links). You'll see who really cares about others, based on charities they've given to. Bush - something like 20% of his income, Kerry ZERO!

Oh yeah, and guess what? I'm 100% pro-choice and pro gay marriage. When I make my choice in the best leader for me and my fellow Americans, I look at the whole picture! Right now, SECURITY is the most important for me. You vote how you want, I'll vote how I want. Just please stop trying to shove your 'unfounded' bullsh*t down the throats of others. You never know when your's may be in the hands of someone who finds out what you truely stand for.





new topics
top topics
 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join